It looks different, feels more upmarket inside and the new Mazda3 has options that were unimaginable in smaller cars (at this price-point anyway) just a handful of years ago. Things such as a head-up display, colour touchscreen, a real-time traffic and weather update service and even radar cruise control.

There’s also a hill-hold function and a reverse camera is standard on all but the most basic Neo model, a variant designed to tempt people into dealerships.

New Mazda3

What is almost certainly driving small-car sales more than an imaginary downsizing trend is the move towards greater fuel efficiency.

Part of our first drive involved a freeway cruise in the new Mazda3, which managed an excellent 5.6 litres per 100km. That’s a result many diesel hatchbacks of the same size would struggle to match, yet it’s all done with conventional technology marketed under the Skyactiv banner.

Despite a trend towards smaller engines fitted with turbochargers the Mazda philosophy is that a well-engineered 2.0-litre engine can do the same job.

There’s also a manufacturing cost advantage in remaining non-turbocharged as well as simpler servicing for the owner and a potential fuel consumption advantage in real world driving (car makers are getting sneakier at making their windscreen stickers look better than what you can achieve in everyday driving).

Throw in the use of high-strength steel to increase strength without adding to the car’s weight and excellent aerodynamics (a drag coefficient of just 0.26 for the sedan) and Mazda is claiming a massive 30 per cent cut in fuel consumption over the old car. To be fair, the Mazda3 it replaces was one of the thirstiest small cars on the market, but it’s jumped to being one of the best.

Mazda will offer two petrol engines in the new 3, a 2.5-litre unit and the 2.0-litre tested here. Given the fuel economy of the petrol, we can’t wait to see what sort of figures the diesel will produce.

Our test car was also fitted with the six-speed conventional automatic transmission, Mazda again ignoring the voguish double-clutch gearboxes that work brilliantly once you’re moving but can hesitate in traffic.

Part of its Skyactiv technology, however, is a function that keeps the torque converter partially locked up even during gearshifts, so it feels taut and positive in its action.

The engine itself is much quieter and smoother than previous generation Mazda petrol engines and while it spins freely, it does get a tiny bit strained as you approach the 6000rpm redline.

It’s not as punchy or playful as a good turbo motor, either, but it certainly does everything it needs to or would be expected of it. And that potential fuel economy just can’t be underestimated.

The big bogey of previous Mazda3s were their interior noise, but here, Mazda has found a fix.

There’s very little wind noise, almost no suspension noise and only some tyre roar on coarse surfaces to upset the interior serenity.

The move to electrically-assisted power-steering has also seen a change in the preciseness. While it feels more composed at speed it’s lost a little of its tactility through the wheel and perhaps a small measure of its eagerness to turn in.

The pay-off is a much more grown-up ride at the cost of a little body roll. But the suspension settings, in particular, seem beautifully considered.

That cars like the Holden Calais of the last decade are a size bigger than they’ve ever been suggests that the trend had to stop somewhere.

And with the Mazda’s all round abilities and the fact that it’s brings a spacious, well presented interior there’s little reason to think this latest one want continue its broad-ranging appeal.

10 comments so far

Number plate placement looks like an after thought.Also where are you driving? You Yangs, Lang Lang, other?

Commenter

greco

Location

mel

Date and time

January 28, 2014, 5:29PM

Hey Drive, my 4 year old Golf gets 5.4l/100km on the freeway, so the Mazda is hardly impressive and it makes less power and torque than my 1.4l. Also the 2.5l uses more fuiel than Golf GTi and there's no comparison between performance.

Commenter

daffy

Location

Date and time

January 28, 2014, 8:37PM

One significant difference between your Golf and the 3 is that after 50,000 km your Golf is basically worthless and has probably fallen to pieces. Not so the 3. That's an impressive distinction, I'd have thought!

Commenter

Curia Regis

Location

Date and time

January 28, 2014, 11:07PM

Not doubting what you are saying, daffy, but frankly, I am getting sick of people bragging about L/100km, when $/100km is a far more relevant and fairer comparison across the board, whether it is the clean cheap and abundant LPG, regular unleaded, premium unleaded, or diesel. Now I am pretty sure that the about-to-be-superseded Mazda 3 (SP20) Skyactiv uses regular unleaded, while every turbo Golf recommends if not needs premium. Happy to be corrected on this. But if I am right, and the upcoming Mazda3 is also happy with regular (Drive can you please clarify whether the 5.6L/100km was done using regular unleaded?), then the real-world running costs could be much closer than what daffy perhaps would like us to think!

Speaking of real world running costs, we have not even talked about the long term servicing and repair costs of a downsized turbo engine compared to a larger non-turbo engine, including the likely greater cost of repair after even a mild front-ender for downsized-turbo-engined vehicles, due to all the extra plumbing at the front including the often vulnerable location of a front-mounted intercooler which, in turn, may bump up the comprehensive insurance premium. Again, happy to be corrected on this.

But lastly: comparing the Mazda 3's non-turbo 2.5 against the Golf's turbo 2.0? Last time I've checked, I don't think they are even competing at the same price point...? Perhaps it might be fairer to compare the upcoming MPS (should it be released) against the GTI if it is going to be FWD and at the same price point, or against the R if the MPS is going to be AWD and at the same price point...?

Sorry J, standard unleaded is just garbage, it's made from the purile Singapore crude and is high in sulphur. Tes 98 octane is a rip-off, but it's still a much better fuel than regular.

Why not compare them. There is no MPS model and may never be, all I was saying that this quasi gutless car does no better than the much better performing Golf for fuel consumption and doesn't cost much less, which is just wrong. Drive likes to make a big deal about the SkyActive engines, but they are nothing special at all.

Commenter

daffy

Location

Date and time

January 30, 2014, 12:24PM

The Golf will be fine if you keep it while under lease.About time to jump, Dafty

Commenter

unemotional realist

Location

Date and time

April 13, 2014, 10:34PM

Best engineered car of 2014 and I think it will hold the mantle right through.

The figures from that 2.0L, i.e. power versus consumption, are utterly amazing from a naturally aspirated engine. And thank you Mazda for sticking with a torque converter rather than a whiny CVT or jolty DSG.

Offering all this while holding relatively steady on entry level pricing is commendable. After the ridiculous price hikes on 6 I was a little concerned. And none of this ieLoop complexity, great one less thing to service

Commenter

addy

Location

perth

Date and time

January 29, 2014, 1:14AM

6000rpm redline doesn't sound like much fun, given that it probably has no torque until you get to 4000. It seems the more I learn about this new model, the less impressed I am. Still, I should wait until I can see for myself. I went to Eurocars in Artarmon yesterday and they had a bout a dozen outgoing models but no new ones.

Commenter

MotorMouth

Location

Sydney

Date and time

January 30, 2014, 11:29AM

My series 6 golf has done 50000kms, I have never paid more than $400 for a service and the service intervals are every 15000kms, I have never had to top the oil up between services and on the freeway it uses about 3.4 litres / 100kms. It's average usage since purchase on mainly city driving is 5.2l. My series 7 Golf automatic uses 6.4l around town and you can say what you like but the 7 speed DSG gearbox is superb.